By Don A. Wright
On Tuesday, March 11, 2025 the California State Senate’s Natural Resources and Water Committee held an informational hearing – Sustainable Groundwater Management Act at 11 Years: Progress and Challenges, scheduled to begin at 9:00am in Sacramento and online. Due to the length of the hearing this report is in two parts. Part one was a panel giving historical perspective on the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. This is part two.
According to its website the Natural Resources and Water Committee has jurisdiction over, “Bills relating to conservation and management of public resources, fish and wildlife, regulation of oil, mining, geothermal development, wetlands and lakes, global atmospheric effects, ocean and bay pollution, coastal resources, forestry practices, recreation, parks and historical resources, and water supply management.”
State Senator Monique Limon is Chair and Senator Kelly Seyarto is Vice Chair. Also on the Committee are Senators Benjamin Allen, Shannon Grove, Melissa Hurtado, John Laird and Henry Stern.
Speaking to the Committee were, Richard Frank-UC Davis Law Professor, Paul Gosselin-Deputy Director for Sustainable Water Management Department of Water Resources, Tina Cannon Leahy-Supervising Attorney State Water Resources Control Board, Javier Silva-Water Operator Yokayo Tribe, Lyn Carlisle-Executive Director Cuyama Valley Family Resource Center, Piret Harmon-General Manager Salinas Valley Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency and Arshdeep Singh-President Punjabi American Growers Group.
Panel Two: SGMA Implementation: Triumphs and Challenges
Limon asked the return panelists to be brief. Gosselin and Leahy complied. They said there has been some success in moving the procedure along. Leahy said there is too much overlap in more than one claim to a water right.
Silva spoke from Zoom. He looked like a cool biker and apologized for not being able to attend but he lives in Ft. Bragg. He said he’s of direct Native American descent from a tribe trying to get federal recognition. He is the tribe’s water operator and has been involved in
the Ukiah Valley GSA. He said the SGMA requirements have been a strain on the tribes and there wasn’t enough thought put into SGMA. He mentioned there isn’t consideration for native plants the tribes need. He would like DWR to get the tribes more involved. He said there are political and technical considerations in putting together the GSP without more tribal engagement. He said having only one tribal representative places a burden on that representative. I don’t know if he was referring to himself.
Silva said there are questions about trust land groundwater that is raising concerns about inclusion under di minimus use. He thanked the Committee for the opportunity to speak.
Carlisle spoke next saying her organization primarily helps farm workers in an agricultural area. She said there was overhead spraying of crops during the hottest time of the day in the Cuyama Valley. This is located in western Kern and eastern Santa Barbara Counties. I believe she said there are roughly 1,800 people living there. This is a dry part of the state. She said 70 percent of the groundwater is pumped by Bolthouse and Grimmway Farms. She said all the other farmers are not contributing to overdraft.
Carlisle said the big growers were instrumental in forming a water district in the valley after SGMA came along. There was an implication this was sinister, at least it came across that way to me. But I’d wager SGMA has been the catalyst to create more water districts in the past 10 years than all other causes in the past 50 years combined. She also cited the unfairness of late arrivals of small farmers not getting enough pumping to supply their permanent crops with enough water.
She said the big farmers have instigated adjudication because they don’t like the GSP and this is the case of the school district Limon referred to earlier. Carlisle said SGMA hasn’t yet improved the lives of those in the Cuyama Valley and she hopes adjudication can be reversed.
Harmon spoke next saying the GSAs are now teenagers and to consider the growing pains. She said the Salinas Valley is a State Highway 101 corridor full of large and small ag. It is a microcosm of the state. There are vastly different climates; inland heat and coastal cool. She said the groundwater has always been managed in the Salinas Valley but not in a cooperative manner. SGMA brought cohesion to the table.
Harmon at first thought having six subbasins and one GSA was nuts, but now she sees the wisdom in this. She said having one board to work through everything is a much better course. She said the challenge is balancing the unique needs of everyone. One size doesn’t fit all. How are costs to be divided fairly? Just forming the GSA and writing the GSP are large costs. Then there’s implementing plans and projects. She likened having all of these competing interests to having children.
She said saltwater intrusion is analogous to subsidence. Pumping near the coast draws in seawater. There is a solution but it’s not clear if it’s affordable. She said the domestic users are the most vulnerable as they have the shallowest wells. Salinas is developing a pilot program to deal with rural, domestic well conservation. Harmon is also concerned about a bottleneck of programs
Singh was the last speaker and said there are many good things in SGMA but many challenges as well. He said he’ll talk about the Punjabi American Growers Group recommendations given the information they have. He acknowledged the tribal people of California. PAGG is a nonprofit that has started working with state and federal agencies in 2020. The goal of PAGG is to keep family growers in business. The language barrier was addressed at the beginning. The group didn’t expect such a great emphasis on water.
Most PAGG growers are in the San Joaquin Valley although there are other members across the state. But the San Joaquin Valley is ground zero for SGMA. He said SGMA as a framework is good but outreach and implementation has been a total disaster. A survey from CSU-WATER found much of the growers were unaware or underinformed about SGMA. In 2019-20 banks were giving out baskets of cash for almond growers and the land was valued high. Then SGMA and Covid hits. He believes the majority of negative impacts of deficient outreach has already started impacted growers.
He said in Madera there is a $1 billion problem and a $10 million solution offered for Multibenefit Land Repurposing. There is 1-1.5 million acres of farmland in jeopardy, but this isn’t spread over all of California, it’s just the San Joaquin Valley.
Singh said there is a solution although he said the lack of outreach set folks behind in starting the implementation. Solar will help white land property but that isn’t enough. He’d like CDFA to provide more grant funds to help the white lands. Limon thanked him for providing some recommendations.
Grove thanked the panel for their testimony and suggested solutions. She expressed her concern with the drop in property taxes impacting the local governments’ ability to maintain services. She wants a better outreach to non-English speakers.
By this time only Limon and Grove were left behind the dais. Limon asked the panel what appropriate representation and engagement would look like. Gosselin said DWR said the focus is the outcome of the GSPs but all users must be represented. He said SGMA sets a far higher bar for outreach than the Brown Act.
Harmon said engagement is made of providing information and there are resources for this. But the hitch in the get along is get this to the younger folks in a more creative way. Engagement means going to the impacted people where they gather.
Carlisle said it is unreasonable to expect people to work and go to meetings. She wants more equitable engagement. Leahy said there is fear in communities to attend meetings. Singh said you must be careful in translating the message and take it to the people who need this. He said outreach has failed from both sides, not just the agencies but the willingness of the target market to get engaged.
Limon said there are many challenges and there is no room to pick winners and losers. Grove commented she doesn’t believe the State Board wants to take over the subbasins, but if they did what would that look like. Leahy said the State Board’s goal is to work with the locals to attain sustainability by imposing an interim plan after one year of probation. She said that would likely be a temporary demand management procedure. That means reduced pumping. She said the State Board would look to the portions of the subbasin that were working and use them as a template.
Public Comment
Community Water Center spokesperson was first and thanked the hearing for including drinking water. This person wants more money to address climate change and funding for their cause.
A Sacramento Regional Water Authority spokesman said everyone can be groundwater winners. He said that [groundwater winner] is taking place in Sacramento (didn’t mention the amount of river water flowing through the area.) He said SGMA works but to watch out for the surrounding groundwater legislation.
UC Davis laws student said the Small Farmer Legal Clinic has been helping small farmers with adjudication and SGMA matters.
An Audubon Society spokesman said wetlands haven’t been considered to the significance needed.
Sonoma & Petaluma GSAs said SGMA’s one size fits all is detrimental as there isn’t the economy of scale to afford these costs for smaller subbasins.
Some fellow who didn’t say who he was recommended more funding for the MLRP. It’s woefully underfunded.
ACWA’s spokesman said from the beginning there was doubt SGMA’s timeline was long enough but the locals have stepped up. And again, there’s the issue of time. He recommended the state allow the subbasins the time to work it out.
A Leadership Council for Justice & Accountability spokes gal urged more funding to DAC outreach.
Senator Hurtado said she was thankful for the participation and Limon stressed Hurtado was instrumental in getting this hearing on the schedule. She then adjourned the committee at 11:42am.
Some Other Impressions
We reached out to Dr. Steve Blumenshine, Executive Director of CSU-WATER who attended the hearing online. CSU-WATER recently conducted a farmer survey (mentioned by Arshdeep Singh and led by collaborator Dr. Anita Chaudhry of CSU-Chico.) This survey provided quantitative information on farmers’ concerns with SGMA presently but also for the future with respect to water allocations and farmland valuation.
Blumenshine said, “Our ongoing SGMA research found many of the same issues covered during the many events recognizing the 10th anniversary of SGMA during 2024. The survey also found SGMA vulnerabilities associated with small farms, groundwater dependency, and the economic impact of being employed outside of farming in an ag dominate economy.”
He said the next phase for CSU-WATER SGMA research will address some critical needs including groundwater demand reduction and the economic resilience of small farms and communities under SGMA.
We also reached out to Singh. Note the Punjabi community farms more than 750,000 acres in California.
“The key takeaway from the hearing is clear—there is a strong push to reinforce SGMA law, making it difficult to challenge. However, the same level of urgency is lacking when it comes to addressing the negative impacts of SGMA implementation on affected communities,” said Singh.
“A positive development from the hearing was that, for the first time, a grower was able to share their perspective on SGMA. The Punjabi American Growers Group remains optimistic that the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee will acknowledge these concerns and work toward a viable path forward for the 1-1.5 million acres of land at risk.”
DISCLAIMER OF RESPONSIBILITY; Waterwrights.net strives to provide its clients with the most complete, up-to-date, and accurate information available. Nevertheless, Waterwrights.net does not serve as a guarantor of the accuracy or completeness of the information provided, and specifically disclaims any and all responsibility for information that is not accurate, up-to-date, or complete. Waterwrights.net’s clients therefore rely on the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of information from Waterwrights.net entirely at their own risk. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author and do not represent any advertisers or third parties.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2025 by WaterWrights.net
